Cyclist-bashers' attacks are monotonous (From Wirral Globe)

It amazes me how cyclists demand that everybody should adhere to the highway code then ignore it themselves, pedestrians are at risk from motorised traffic on the highway and cyclists on the pavement, yes motorists do break the law, but the we are a special case cyclist brigade who continually blame everybody else want to take a long hard look at themselves and their behaviour on the roads and the pavements.

uncatom wrote:
It amazes me how cyclists demand that everybody should adhere to the highway code then ignore it themselves, pedestrians are at risk from motorised traffic on the highway and cyclists on the pavement, yes motorists do break the law, but the we are a special case cyclist brigade who continually blame everybody else want to take a long hard look at themselves and their behaviour on the roads and the pavements.

Don't be amazed, Sir. This is just an illusion, your own mind is playing tricks on you. You see, contrary to popular belief cyclists are just individual people mounted on bicycles in a similar way to how drivers are just people in the driving seat of a car.

You say cyclists "ignore it themselves". I ride a bike AND I drive a car, and naturally, I also walk about the place too. I tell you something, and this may come as a surprise to you; I manage to both drive and cycle in adherence to the highway code. That's through personal choice made by myself, as an individual person. The actions of other people mounted on bicycles may differ as will the actions of other people driving cars. That's the thing, you see: I am not a member of some collective known as "motorist" or "cyclist" and I won't be held accountable for actions other than my own. I apply this when it comes to other instances of lazy generalisation too including gender matters etc.

Just re-read your comments. There is no "cyclist brigade", just some individuals who choose to cycle. It's your own mind that is projecting lazy confirmation bias onto a mass of otherwise unrelated people. Perhaps it's time to take a long hard look at yourself and your own cognitive behaviour before you sit at your keyboard and embarrass yourself.

Thank you.

farmer_robot wrote:

uncatom wrote:
It amazes me how cyclists demand that everybody should adhere to the highway code then ignore it themselves, pedestrians are at risk from motorised traffic on the highway and cyclists on the pavement, yes motorists do break the law, but the we are a special case cyclist brigade who continually blame everybody else want to take a long hard look at themselves and their behaviour on the roads and the pavements.

Don't be amazed, Sir. This is just an illusion, your own mind is playing tricks on you. You see, contrary to popular belief cyclists are just individual people mounted on bicycles in a similar way to how drivers are just people in the driving seat of a car.

You say cyclists "ignore it themselves". I ride a bike AND I drive a car, and naturally, I also walk about the place too. I tell you something, and this may come as a surprise to you; I manage to both drive and cycle in adherence to the highway code. That's through personal choice made by myself, as an individual person. The actions of other people mounted on bicycles may differ as will the actions of other people driving cars. That's the thing, you see: I am not a member of some collective known as "motorist" or "cyclist" and I won't be held accountable for actions other than my own. I apply this when it comes to other instances of lazy generalisation too including gender matters etc.

Just re-read your comments. There is no "cyclist brigade", just some individuals who choose to cycle. It's your own mind that is projecting lazy confirmation bias onto a mass of otherwise unrelated people. Perhaps it's time to take a long hard look at yourself and your own cognitive behaviour before you sit at your keyboard and embarrass yourself.

Thank you.

My response is to the previous posts on this site were individuals defend the riding of bicycles on the pavements because of the poor behaviour of other road users eg: the pedestrian ,and the motorist, yet I have seen no response from you condeming their cognitive behaviour nor their lazy generalisation,you state you are a motorist and you cycle(I wont mention cyclist because it might be taken as a lazy generalisation)It would seem that those people were condeming you as a collective, yet you failed to respond,funny that, perhaps I inadvertantly hit the proverbial nerve.
By the way it is allowed to generalise.

Thank you

IMO most of the cyclists who ride on the pavement do it because they can't be bothered learning how to negotiate traffic. It's laziness, pure and simple. Maybe lack of confidence too.
Here's an idea: next time you see a cyclist on the pavement, as they pass you, reach over and push him--or her--into the road. They may well be grateful that you've made the decision to use the road instead of the pavement for them; just as those non swimmers who doggy paddle desperately to safety after being shoved into water often learn to swim.

As a cyclist, walker and driver of a motor vehicle, i see bad road sence from all users, but the ones who have the worst attitude are motorists, using vehicles to intimidate road users, parking where they like, and ignoring traffic signals,speed limits and other highway rules,seems to be worse between the hours of 8 and 9 3 and 4 pm and all this while enclosed in a steel shell, playing with a sat nav,radio,ipod, and other playthings now fitted to motor vehicles, strangely mirrors and indicators seem to be a taxable item as theyre not used as much as they should be,,imagine the carnage if walkers just stopped suddenly,started running or changed direction without looking round,yet motorists do it frequently.

Thankfully Travelwise produce free maps for us cyclists and walkers covering all areas of the wirral and merseyside, which featuure many signed off road tarmaced routes, which sometimes are faster than the road trip in a vehicle, then we get free travel for bikes on merseyrail, and the ferries, so commuting becomes faster and less stressful..

There are also all the free park and ride sites to leave the car safely parked and catch the train to your destination,,you could drive to a park and ride, get the bikeout, and then catch the train to your destination and cycle on further,reducing the use of the car, and getting fiter.

uncatom wrote:

farmer_robot wrote:

uncatom wrote:
It amazes me how cyclists demand that everybody should adhere to the highway code then ignore it themselves, pedestrians are at risk from motorised traffic on the highway and cyclists on the pavement, yes motorists do break the law, but the we are a special case cyclist brigade who continually blame everybody else want to take a long hard look at themselves and their behaviour on the roads and the pavements.

Don't be amazed, Sir. This is just an illusion, your own mind is playing tricks on you. You see, contrary to popular belief cyclists are just individual people mounted on bicycles in a similar way to how drivers are just people in the driving seat of a car.

You say cyclists "ignore it themselves". I ride a bike AND I drive a car, and naturally, I also walk about the place too. I tell you something, and this may come as a surprise to you; I manage to both drive and cycle in adherence to the highway code. That's through personal choice made by myself, as an individual person. The actions of other people mounted on bicycles may differ as will the actions of other people driving cars. That's the thing, you see: I am not a member of some collective known as "motorist" or "cyclist" and I won't be held accountable for actions other than my own. I apply this when it comes to other instances of lazy generalisation too including gender matters etc.

Just re-read your comments. There is no "cyclist brigade", just some individuals who choose to cycle. It's your own mind that is projecting lazy confirmation bias onto a mass of otherwise unrelated people. Perhaps it's time to take a long hard look at yourself and your own cognitive behaviour before you sit at your keyboard and embarrass yourself.

Thank you.

My response is to the previous posts on this site were individuals defend the riding of bicycles on the pavements because of the poor behaviour of other road users eg: the pedestrian ,and the motorist, yet I have seen no response from you condeming their cognitive behaviour nor their lazy generalisation,you state you are a motorist and you cycle(I wont mention cyclist because it might be taken as a lazy generalisation)It would seem that those people were condeming you as a collective, yet you failed to respond,funny that, perhaps I inadvertantly hit the proverbial nerve.
By the way it is allowed to generalise.

Thank you

Your response was a generalisation of all cyclists.I haven't "failed" to respond to anything (just because you've taken the time to write a pointless criticism that ultimately misses the point, doesn't mean anyone else HAS to take the time to respond to you, or anyone else spouting such idiocy, for that matter). Why would I respond to criticism of pavement cycling etc "as a collective" (you're really not getting this are you), when I am not a part of this "collective". I am some bloke trying to get to work on a bike. If you catch me riding on a pavement or goign through red lights then you can have as much as a moan about me as you like.

Here we go : "I've hit a nerve" - pointless ad hominem.

"By the way it is allowed to generalise

uncatom wrote:

farmer_robot wrote:

uncatom wrote:
It amazes me how cyclists demand that everybody should adhere to the highway code then ignore it themselves, pedestrians are at risk from motorised traffic on the highway and cyclists on the pavement, yes motorists do break the law, but the we are a special case cyclist brigade who continually blame everybody else want to take a long hard look at themselves and their behaviour on the roads and the pavements.

Don't be amazed, Sir. This is just an illusion, your own mind is playing tricks on you. You see, contrary to popular belief cyclists are just individual people mounted on bicycles in a similar way to how drivers are just people in the driving seat of a car.

You say cyclists "ignore it themselves". I ride a bike AND I drive a car, and naturally, I also walk about the place too. I tell you something, and this may come as a surprise to you; I manage to both drive and cycle in adherence to the highway code. That's through personal choice made by myself, as an individual person. The actions of other people mounted on bicycles may differ as will the actions of other people driving cars. That's the thing, you see: I am not a member of some collective known as "motorist" or "cyclist" and I won't be held accountable for actions other than my own. I apply this when it comes to other instances of lazy generalisation too including gender matters etc.

Just re-read your comments. There is no "cyclist brigade", just some individuals who choose to cycle. It's your own mind that is projecting lazy confirmation bias onto a mass of otherwise unrelated people. Perhaps it's time to take a long hard look at yourself and your own cognitive behaviour before you sit at your keyboard and embarrass yourself.

Thank you.

My response is to the previous posts on this site were individuals defend the riding of bicycles on the pavements because of the poor behaviour of other road users eg: the pedestrian ,and the motorist, yet I have seen no response from you condeming their cognitive behaviour nor their lazy generalisation,you state you are a motorist and you cycle(I wont mention cyclist because it might be taken as a lazy generalisation)It would seem that those people were condeming you as a collective, yet you failed to respond,funny that, perhaps I inadvertantly hit the proverbial nerve.
By the way it is allowed to generalise.

Thank you

Your response was a generalisation of all cyclists.I haven't "failed" to respond to anything (just because you've taken the time to write a pointless criticism that ultimately misses the point, doesn't mean anyone else HAS to take the time to respond to you, or anyone else spouting such idiocy, for that matter). Why would I respond to criticism of pavement cycling etc "as a collective" (you're really not getting this are you), when I am not a part of this "collective". I am some bloke trying to get to work on a bike. If you catch me riding on a pavement or goign through red lights then you can have as much as a moan about me as you like.

Here we go : "I've hit a nerve" - pointless ad hominem.

"By the way it is allowed to generalise" - No one is stopping you. But don't expect to be able to do so in a public forum without someone pointing out how generalisation based on modal choice is completely irrelevant. Most of the idiots I encounter on a daily basis are wearing shoes. To extrapolate this into some weird confirmation bias fueled generalisation of the vast majority of the shoe wearing population would be utterly pointless.

Do feel free, though, to continue to spout such nonsense. Just expect people to respond.

bickyboy wrote:
IMO most of the cyclists who ride on the pavement do it because they can't be bothered learning how to negotiate traffic. It's laziness, pure and simple. Maybe lack of confidence too.
Here's an idea: next time you see a cyclist on the pavement, as they pass you, reach over and push him--or her--into the road. They may well be grateful that you've made the decision to use the road instead of the pavement for them; just as those non swimmers who doggy paddle desperately to safety after being shoved into water often learn to swim.

Have you stopped and asked the people on the pavement why they're riding? Is it because they're lazy or are intimidated by some of the poor driving that is common amongst some people? I guess you won't know unless you ask.

Are you certain that the pavement you refer to isn't in fact a shared use path. these are growing in numbers are are sometimes poorly signed.

As for pushing a cyclist into a road. Why don't *you* do this the next time you are out and see what the outcome is, both from the person on the bike who may or may not be riding illegally, and from the police, and from other pedestrians. Please do write back with your findings from this experiment.

Robot, your request for experimental findings won't happen because its really easy to 'dead hard' when you're behind the wheel of a two tonne motor.

Jack Boot wrote:
Robot, your request for experimental findings won't happen because its really easy to 'dead hard' when you're behind the wheel of a two tonne motor.

It won't happen because it's far easier to sit in front of a computer screen, publishing fantasies about pushing cyclists about the place, than to actually go out there and face the consequences of such idiotic ideas. I can tell you, if I saw someone push a cyclist off a path and into the road, I'd get off my bike and make the experiment even more "interesting" for the person conducting it :-)

farmer_robot wrote:

bickyboy wrote:
IMO most of the cyclists who ride on the pavement do it because they can't be bothered learning how to negotiate traffic. It's laziness, pure and simple. Maybe lack of confidence too.
Here's an idea: next time you see a cyclist on the pavement, as they pass you, reach over and push him--or her--into the road. They may well be grateful that you've made the decision to use the road instead of the pavement for them; just as those non swimmers who doggy paddle desperately to safety after being shoved into water often learn to swim.

Have you stopped and asked the people on the pavement why they're riding? Is it because they're lazy or are intimidated by some of the poor driving that is common amongst some people? I guess you won't know unless you ask.

Are you certain that the pavement you refer to isn't in fact a shared use path. these are growing in numbers are are sometimes poorly signed.

As for pushing a cyclist into a road. Why don't *you* do this the next time you are out and see what the outcome is, both from the person on the bike who may or may not be riding illegally, and from the police, and from other pedestrians. Please do write back with your findings from this experiment.

Dear Robot, my comments were in fact intended to be amusing and ironic; so no "experiment" will there be.
I cycle myself (that is, I ride a bike, not "I use myself as a bike"), and although as a pedestrian I do sometimes encounter those slack-jawed, lobotomised doombrains who ride on the pavements because they simply can't be bothered learning how to ride on the road, for the most part I realise that many cyclists choose the pavement because it's safer. The only long term solution to that is proper protection for cyclists in the form of a wider network of safe routes. Painting L S Lowry-like representations of bikes on the odd strip of pink tarmac as a sop to the "green travel" lobby isn't quite enough.